by ANB-BIA, Brussels, March 1998
That Africa still has massive problems, no-one will deny. There is still poverty, disease, malnutrition, ethnic strife, refugees, etc., but an effort is being made by Africa, to find a solution to Africa's own problems.
In June 1997, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) held its 33rd Summit in Harare, Zimbabwe. Leaders present, pledged themselves to protect human rights and re-establish prospects for sustainable development. They also agreed on a common platform in the establishment of the African Court of Human Rights. The Summit pinpointed areas of potential conflict within the African continent. Food problems come first, followed by land disputes, problems arising from international boundaries cutting across traditional tribal lands, and over-emphasis on tribal allegiance. The Summit expressed anxiety that the rural poor, who after all constitute over 70% of Africa's population, do not yet seem to have understood the meaning of democracy and the fact that within any democratic society, the individual has certain rights which must be maintained.
The OAU, Africa's own international organisation, grew out of the early days of Pan-Africanism, and by the late 1950s had developed into the idea of a community of independent African states, as opposed to earlier moves towards political union. In May 1963, Emperor Haile Selassie persuaded the leaders of 30 independent African countries to attend a meeting at Addis Ababa, where they signed the charter of the Organisation of African Unity on 26 May 1963.
Three principal objectives in the OAU's 15- page Charter, were: 1) To defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of African states; 2) To eradicate colonialism from Africa; 3) To promote international co-operation, having due regard to the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
There is a belief that as the century draws to a close, the OAU Charter should be re-written to define new forms of colonialism and provide an enabling environment for the free market economy and democratisation. It should spell out conditions to achieve a better life for Africans, and protect their social, political and economic rights.
Faultfinders say the OAU has not been clearly associated with the people's daily needs for food, water, clothes, housing and medicine. But economic co-operation and integration which can help bring these things about, are impracticable without stability and security.
Shortly after the 1997 OAU Summit, its Secretary- General, Salim Ahmed Salim said: "Challenges facing the OAU and the continent in general, include spearheading economic development and the consolidation of democracy through constitutional rule and changes. From now on, the OAU will strongly oppose any group or people who topple a democratically elected government. There must be a wind of change to ensure democracy prevails in Africa".
A feature of today's Africa is the policy of regionalism - the grouping of countries in a political, economic or monetary union which is gaining ground right across Africa. In fact, the motto "No integration, no salvation" is one Africa should and is making its own, especially when it is appreciated that large groupings are essential for an acceptable future.
Take the case of West Africa. Here, there are many factors favouring integration and the West African Ec- onomic and Monetary Union (UEMOA) seems to be a businesslike answer to an obvious need, or rather, an imperative for regional cooperation. Although the experience of meagre results from the defunct West African Economic Community (CEAO) and the Economic Community of West African States (CEDEAO, victims of their own lack of cohesion and internal contradictions, would not appear to give much in the way of ground for optimism, West Africans, nevertheless, believe in the feasibility of integration. UEMOA's creation is eloquent evidence of that. Better still, it is in many ways, an experience of a new kind of integration, since in contrast with the former CEAO and CEDEAO, the new UEMOA has as starting- point, the geographical and cultural proximity of its member- states.
In a word, it is a kind of integration which is based on a solid foundation and has the merit of getting off the ground with a monetary union which will eventually evolve into economic integration.
Across the continent, into East Africa: Kenya, Ug-anda and Tanzania have moved closer into establishing an economic and political federation, by adopting a common passport and flag, signifying deeper integration. The passport and flag were launched in 1997 by the Presidents of the three countries concerned, who met to discuss the progress made in deepening the East African Cooperation, which was officially launched in 1996. They also set the ground for a formal treaty. Presently, the three countries are bound by an agreement which they signed, establishing a permanent tripartite commission.
Although the present co-operation is limited to the three states, it is envisaged that in future, it should cover other neighbouring countries which are geographically within the East African region.
Since the co-operation agreement was signed, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania have tried to harmonize their fiscal and monetary policies. Other important achievements include the convertibility of the currencies, pre-budget and post-budget consultations between the three Finance Ministers, synchronisation of the budget day, regular consultations between the central banks, and co-operation in major financial regulations.
Down into southern Africa, and there we find the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). SADC (formerly the Southern African Development Co-Ordination Conference - SADCC) was set up in 1979 to harmonise economic development among countries in southern Africa and reduce their dependence on the of that time.
In September 1997, the SADC held its 17th Summit in Blantyre, Malawi, and took landmark decisions aimed at driving the Community across new frontiers, and forging its integration agenda.
To show commitment to creating a landmine free southern Africa, the Summit also signed a declaration on the ban of anti-personnel landmines. The leaders also approved the establishment of the SADC Parliamentary Forum.
In a bid to expand the regional market, the Summit unanimously decided to accept into the family of SADC nations, two new members: The Seychelles and Congo RDC. (Other members are: Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe).
On 1 December 1997, the OAU's Secretary-General, Salim Ahmed Salim said that the fundamental principles of democracy are universal and applicable to all, including Africa. The difficulty lies with the practical application of these principles, and as the 1990s draw to a close, it is clear that "Democracy" as we know it in the West, has failed in many parts of Africa. Part of the problem is that the very word "Democracy" is ambiguous. It does not have the same meaning for Europeans, Africans and Asians. Many African countries have found (to their cost), that to take on board a pure western- style form of democracy, simply does not work in their own environment. Western liberal democracy (multipartyism), as a model of governance, has proved highly problematic when in operation in many African states, because the system has no organic socio- historical links with the dynamics of African social formation.
So, by way of conclusion to this analysis of Africa in the 1990s, the question must be asked: "Whither Africa?"
Some countries are in the process of carrying out innovative experiments in political systems. Perhaps these experiments might be more respectful of the African tradition of consensus. It is interesting to note, that already in 1992, Bishop Francis Silota of Mozambique, in an article (Cf. ANB- BIA, number 227) dealing with the realities of democracy in Africa (with reference to the Mozambican situation), had touched on this very point.
He wrote: "A traditional ruler, before taking any decision, consults with his people through their tribal clan or family chiefs. It is true, that in this system there are no opposition parties. However, anything of importance is discussed within the tribal clan or family group. Then the traditional ruler listens to what his chiefs have to say before taking any decision. Surely, this is a form of democracy?"
In Uganda, Yoweri Museveni has instituted the National Resistance Movement. The movement operates on a non- party system, and relies a great deal on its local governments, called "resistance councils". The councils are built on a pyramidal hierarchical structure. In this way, they work through parish (civil), sub-county council, council and district levels. Power is thus decentralised and decision-making percolates up from the bottom.
Another method, known as the "Tinkhundla" system exists in Swaziland. "Tinkhundla" means a centre, a place where people meet. It is a traditional system of administration that emphasises the political empowerment of the rural masses. Local councils (which are elected under a non-party electoral system) make policies in their own areas, and even plan their own development.
By whichever means Africa lives out its democracy in the years to come, one thing is clear. The mad rush towards Globalisation is an indication that countries, especially those in Africa, must define their own democratic and developmental models, before the Third Millennium comes upon them.
THE END
1. The winds of change ||
2.Democracy in Africa - Reality or Myth?|| 3. Africa and the World Community
4. Manifestations of Democracy: An independent Press and a
free Judiciary
5. The realities of Globalisation
CONTENTS | ANB-BIA HOMEPAGE | WEEKLY NEWS
PeaceLink 1998 - Reproduction authorised, with usual acknowledgement